[59] CEPHALOPODS OF NORTHEASTERN COAST OF AMERICA. 
belongs. But from his description of the two forms of suckers, it is 
probably one of the lateral arms, if it is in this respect like our young 
A. Harveyi (No. 24). It evidently belongs to an Architeuthis, and is 
very near to our A. princeps. 
In the Zoologist, London, 2d series, No. 118, p. 4526, July, 1875, there 
is an article entitled ‘Notice of a gigantic Cephalopod (Dinoteuthis 
proboscideus), which was stranded at Dingle, in Kerry, two hundred 
years ago. By A.G. More, F.L.8.” The article is chiefly a reprint of 
the rude but interesting popular accounts written at the time of the 
capture, and upon these Mr. More proposed to found a new genus and 
species. The character which he mainly relied upon, as of generic value, 
is the power of projecting the beak in the form of a proboscis. But this 
is habitually done by the various common species of Ommastrephes, Lo- 
ligo, &c., and perhaps by all ten-armed Cephalopods. There is not suf- 
ficient evidence, from the published accounts, that this specimen differed 
in any way from the Architeuthis monachus. It was described as 19 feet 
in total length; the long arms having been mutilated, the part remain- 
ing was 11 feet long, and as thick as a man’s arm; the short arms varied . 
from 6 to 8 feet in length, and were as thick as a man’s leg, and had two 
rows of large serrated suckers; the proboscis (buccal mass with beak) 
was the size of a wan’s fist; the beak was “‘ somewhat like to an Eagle’s 
Bill, but broader.” The whole animal was said to have been as large as 
a large horse. The length of the head and body together was 8 feet. 
Mr. More has kindly sent me a tracing from the original figure. This 
shows a broad, oval, flat body, and a small caudal fin. The body or 
mantle had evidently been split open and spread out flat. 
This fact is also evident from the original descriptions, reprinted by 
Mr. More, in which the sides of the mantle are described as follows: 
‘Over this Monster’s back was a mantle of a bright Red Coior, with a 
fringe round it; it hung down on both sides like a Carpet on a table, 
falling back on each side, and faced with white.” The liver, according 
to the descriptions, had been removed: ‘‘ When it was dead and opened 
the liver wayed 30 pound.” The proboscis had also been removed be- 
fore it was exhibited, and it#is therefore very probable that the figure 
and descriptions represent it as more extended than was natural. 
The measurements given indicate a specimen smaller than several of 
the American examples, and but little if any larger than our No. 5, from 
Logie Bay. 
The more important of these ancient letters are here reproduced: 
“Letter No. 2, from Thomas Hooke (Dublin) to.Mr. John Wickins (Lon- 
don) December 23, 1673. 
“LOVING FRIEND: I send you this onely pursuant to my former of the 
Fish, which I now confirm to be as I gave you the first Account with 
this addition of certainty, that knowing the man by name James Stew- 
ard, and hearing two or three nights since of his being at a Printers 
